About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CSPAN 9
WHUT (Howard University Television) 8
CSPAN2 5
KQED (PBS) 4
WETA 4
KRCB (PBS) 2
MSNBC 2
MSNBCW 2
WMPT (PBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 37
Search Results 0 to 36 of about 37 (some duplicates have been removed)
drones to a green fleet, i expect similar policies to continue for my former colleague chuck hagel to be confirmed, hopefully as early as next week. for all these reasons i have long been a supporter of renewable fuels, and i encourage the further development of an industry that is important, both to our national security as well as to our farm economy. whether we're talking food or water or energy security, let me put it this way. in the future, more crops in the field can mean fewer soldiers in the field. at the same time, as important as our defense capabilities are, we also need to rebalance for the other free d's. the u.s. today spends more on defense than on diplomacy, democracy and developments all put together. meanwhile, in the past year, china has more than doubled its investment in developing new agricultural technologies. those are the kinds of farsighted policies that are enabling china to emerge as a world power, in which we, frankly, need to get back to. as we shift our focus and our resources towards smarter, more constructive forms of international interaction, it'
was probably one of the very first second-determine nominations that president obama announced. chuck hagel ended up not being in brussels today. he has not become the new defense secretary yet because republicans in the senate have filibustered his nomination. a cabinet nomination has never, ever in the history of the united states been filibustered before. but these republicans in this congress and our time decided that they would do this unprecedented thing to chuck hagel. one of the major items on next week's news calendar is that the republicans are expected to finally relent and allow chuck hagel to be confirmed. but jane mayer published something at the new yorker today that made headlines everywhere today because she turned up the way republicans have been operating in washington at the time they have been trying to stop him. to be clear, even with the unprecedented filibuster, everybody knows that chuck hagel is going to be confirmed as defense secretary. democrats have a majority in the senate. hagel has the support of every single democrat in the senate and he has the support of
on television. today in a 58-40 cloture voted. they blocked chuck hagel being the sex -- secretary of defense. next the hour long debate on the nomination. they said they will not vote for cloture today, i think it's too bad. there's been more than enough time to read the additional speeches that have been coming in. the argument raced beyond that i know has do with the payment an equity fund that was received has been fully explained. as a highly reputable fund that senator hagel was an adviser to like many other reputable people. i think the continuation what amounts to filibuster is too bad when there's a secretary of defense who is leafing to go back to california. we need to have our new secretary of defense in place given the circumstances in this world. we have a budget crisis in this country, our scwesser is confronting us. that's sequester will have a damaging effect on the deference department, on the men and women in uniform. and on the programs, the equipment, the training that they need to be ready for any kind of contingency. so the delay in having a vote on cloture, to me is a
that "anti-israel hagel" and that is there a statement, not yours, why do you think they have that impression? >> first, it is not an accurate quote. >> it is an accurate quotationof of the iranian press. >> it is not an accurate statement of my position. >> right, but why you think they have that impression? >> as i said earlier, have enough difficulty understanding american politics. i surely do not understand iranian politics. but if i might add, i also said there have been some rather significant israeli government leaders who said some pretty nice things about me, current israeli leaders. >> ok, thank you. >> senator king. >> like all of the other today, i want to thank you for your service and particularly your willingness to put yourself through this process to serve your country once again. it is one of my life principles to never take a job where i would have to be confirmed by legislative body. [laughter] and you are doing it. i read one commentator that said, the fact that this guy was an enlisted man in vietnam is nice, but not significant. i think it is very significant. i am a b
a minute. tomorrow, the senate will be in doing a test vote on chuck hagel's nomination for defense secretary. it is a culture wrote -- it is a cloture vote. of congressional hearings going on today. a couple of them are live on c- span 3 or [inaudible]. if you go there you will be able to see all of the hearings. thank you for being with us on the "washington journal." the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., february 14, 2013. i hereby appoint the honorable chris collins to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 3, 2013, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited t
or is it with chuck hagel, john brennan, john kerry? >> it's all the president. the president picks the people that he puts around him, too. with respect to chuck hagel and brennan, defense and c.i.a. just in the last week, their performance in front of the committees that have to confirm them has been pretty poor and that's not my judgment, that's the judgment of senators on both sides of the aisle. >> if you were in the senate would you vote against confirmation of chuck hagel? >> i would. >> rose: there are those who argue that this is personal with respect to chuck hagel because he said what he said with respect to the surge. is it for you personal? >> no, it's not personal for me. i presided or participated in the senate policy, republican policy for eight years. every tuesday when i was in town and i can't recall ever seeing chuck in one of those lunches. he wasn't sort of a very active participant as best i can tell from my perspective. i do believe that there are people that are far better qualified than he is to be -- >> rose: doesn't have the president some choice in determining who he ought
with the chuck hagel confirmation process. do you want to see that move forward? guest: i think there are real problems that lie ahead for chuck hagel in this confirmation process and people are uncomfortable with some of his past statements. i know he is the president's choice but i am not so certain that it will happen. host: are you concerned about having a defense secretary in place? you said you'd like to see some of the defense cuts haeded off? guest: i think everyone has concerns with that and they want to make sure the pentagon and military posts have strong seasoned leadership teams. regardless of having the secretary or not having one is a portent concern. -- a point of concern. you have a good strong team that will be able to manage through this process. they have seen this coming. as you would expect the military to do, they are prepared. host: new hampshire, and the pennant caller -- caller: morning and thank you. i am so tired of the irresponsibility of the republicans. the chuck hagel thing is preposterous. how does it serve the nation to delay the president's choice? it is the
-- sides and they are wrong. guest: that is one of the main selling points about chuck hagel. he is a pragmatist. one of the reasons the president nominated him was that i think he is reading the tenor of the electorate to say this is the kind of person that we want an office, that there is -- and a large proportion of the electorate it is ideal -- ideologically driven and we want more leaders to look at things objectively and with an open mind. i think that was one of the primary reasons why they are very enthusiastic about senator hagel's nomination. i think your point is well taken. host: editors of the new york times asked, it is clear hagel is in the mainstream. the usa today ads of this -- host: richmond virginia on the independent line. caller: i am wondering which american people they are talking about. my sentiments are that the colors before me -- their comments before me, the american people are wondering about what these politicians are basing their assumptions on as far as hagel is concerned. he used to be a parity decent sounding person -- decent sounding person. he
's blocking of further consideration of the nomination of chuck hagel to be the next secretary of defense. we'll be back here in chicago as soon as the president arrives. >> good morning, thanks for talking with us. >> how unusual is it to have the president's pick blocked at this stage of the game? guest: it is very unusual. the senator has never filibustered the president's nomination for the defense secretary. the most bizarre thing, i think, is probably the most frustrating for the people watching this, particularly outside of washington, is that you know, former senator hagel is former republican senator, mind you. the reason why it was defeated because the majority leader harry reid switched his vote to no so he could bring the vote back up again after the senate comes back from recease. a lot of republican senators were saying that they did not want this choice filibustered. even if they wanted to vote no on his nomination he at least deserves an up down vote in order to be approved. the republicans decided to use this vote as a way to extract more information from the white house on i
. if you talk to mike hagel he'll say this is a problem for us. he can go to china and say stop your spying. we do it too. we don target economic entities. we don't target corporations and not stealing the economic research of dupont or intel. we do what they consider traditional spying. the chinese don't and that's a distinction we make. whether china sees it that way or not is an entirely different question. >> rose: how do they know we make that distinction. >> i think there are set of laws under which nsa operates and those laws make it relatively clear the kinds of targets that you have. but if you think about it, we also don't have the system. if we were to take for example some secrets of you know a new jet liner that airbus is making. we typically don't have a system that works that way. we don't pick winners and loser. >> in enact the government knows a lot of stuff they don't tell companies. if they could communicated better with companies about who is hacking them that would go a long time. >> rose: sometimes the companies don't know. >> yes, of course. that's part of the presi
and leadership. and the second is do you support chuck hagel as secretary of defense and what is your evaluation of the criticisms of american general since world war ii. except for you and general petraeus. [laughter] >> you know, it's painful to read about general is being criticized because a lot of it is correct. you see it, and you say, oh, that's me, i am guilty of that. we had shortcomings of not being strategically enough minded, you know, you get very focused on her job, your tactical part of the mission, not thinking of the big strategic problem that you are trying to solve. that may or may not be a good criticism, but it's certainly worth paying attention to. but it is a useful thing to throw out there. what was the first one? >> okay. >> if chuck hagel will take the job right now, god bless them. whoever will be the secretary of defense, they will go through this constricting budget, they will implement things in combat. implementing it is going to be hard. something is going to come to ahead with iran during this for years, just mathematically. it will be a very difficult for years.
confirms a new defense secretary. the president has nominated former senator chuck hagel. this is just under an hour. ♪ [applause] ♪ >> review. ♪ ♪ ["yankee doodle" plays] >> ladies and gentleman, please stand for the playing of the united states national anthem. >> present arms. >> present arms. ["the star-spangled banner" plays] >> please be seated. [indiscernible] >> ready. hut. ladies and gentlemen, general dempsey. [applause] >> mr. president, secretary and mrs. panetta, ambassadors, members of congress, men and women of the armed forces of the united states, especially our wounded warriors, and we cannot forget bravo. i was hoping bravo would be out there for the inspection of troops, but apparently jeremy thought differently. it is an honor to be here for this event. we're here to show our profound respect and thanks to secretary panetta. i recall play "the tempest," which is a nice metaphor, and i like to think of you as the prospero of public service. the secretary has used his arts to imbue a sense of public service in generations of the men and women. and like that k
council, senator chuck hagel, president and ceo fred kemp, it's my pleasure to welcome you here this afternoon for this discussion on managing the crisis in mali. before introducing today's topic, permit me to say a word about the council's africa center for the benefit of the add yoans, those who are new to us, or those of us joining us for the first time via television or the internet. the africa center was established in september 2009 with the mission to help transform u.s. and european policy approaches to africa by emphasizing the building of strong geopolitical partnerships with african states and strengthening economic growth and prosperity on the continent. they seek to inform with policymakers and the general public of the strategic importance of africa, both globally and more american and european interests in particular. a subject, which, obviously, a commitment you share with us by joining us today which is of strategic importance. we do this through publications and a robot media presence. throughout the work to promote constructive u.s. leadership and engagement i
was the president, pretty much. she was constantly on the road. i want to say something about the hagel confirmation -- guesthost: which we will talk about at 8:30, just so you know. caller: people have got to understand -- host: if you want to join us at 8:30 to talk about the hagel confirmation, you are more than welcome to do that. "washington post" -- "iran to in which more uranium." "it is believed to be vastly superior to the clunky 1970's- era ir1 machine that iraq releases, giving iran the ability to produce up to four times as much enriched uranium per machine. iran claims the enriched uranium would it be used exclusively for nuclear power plants, but officials suspect that iran is using nuclear energy for weapons programs." this from "the post," the headline is specifically looking at china. "chinese companies invested $6.5 billion in the united states last year. that's a record, and a 17% increase over the prior year. but that's also about the same amount invested in the united states by spain." secretary of state hillary clinton and her performance over the last four years. giving you an
to become the secretary of defense, chuck hagel. this same week, the senate pas passed by bipartisan majority of 78-22, the violence against women's act. and yet, here in the house, republicans once again, as they did last year, refused to let the american people have a vote on protecting women from domestic violence. and today, republicans in the house decided to cut the pay of the very same people that you heard ms. lowey name to you. law enforcement personnel, health and safety inspectors, embassy personnel. today, the republicans voted to cut their pay. to pay for tax cuts of the very wealthy, to keep subsidies for big oil companies going, things that republicans refuse to eliminate, those types of subsidies and tax loopholes. and so i say to you all, welcome to the new normal for the tea party republicans who control the congress. this is no longer an exception. it is the rule for republicans. 73% of house republicans voted in 2011 for the republican-inspired sequester and has mr. van hollen pointed out, speaker boehner said he got 98% of what he wanted and he says i'm pretty ha
hagel is who served in the military and worked up here on the hill and understands the issues involved there and can be a very effective leader at the pentagon. john brennan is somebody i worked with as director of the c.i.a. and continue to work with in this capacity. and i always found him to be very responsible about how we can effectively conduct operations against al qaeda and against those that would attack this country. he is somebody a straight shooter, somebody who gives you his best opinion. he doesn't play games. he's someone who i think can really honestly represent the best protection of this country in that job. >> thank you very much. and i want to thank you for your forth right comments today about the sequester. ironically as what you said in your statement, it appears the greatest threat to the united states security is the united states congress. thank you, mr. secretary. >> thank you. let me mention this, after senator nelson, the first round will be over. there may be a number of us who may want a few minutes on the second round and you two witnesses have been here
quick questions. thank you for your service and leadership. one, do you support or oppose chuck hagel as secretary of defense? to, what is your violation of thomas ricks criticism of american generals since world war ii except for you and general petraeus? [laughter] >> altaic the second verse. it's painful to read about generals being criticized because a lot of it's correct. you see it and say that's me, i'm guilty of that. we had shortcomings of not being strategically enough minded. you know, you get focused on your job, your tactical part of the mission and not digging the big strategic problem you're trying to solve. one is not firing enough people. we don't fire and not generals. .. you know, from the senate, his time in vietnam is useful because it gives you a context. the most important thing is if he and president obama are a good team, that is what matters. though much worry about his policy positions one way or another because he will be a policy maker. the president's policies will go but the fact that the field that they can be a good team, to me that is the important th
Search Results 0 to 36 of about 37 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)